SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (10822)3/23/2007 5:09:29 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36921
 
Congressional debate gives hope on climate change
Energy Agenda
Julia Blocher
Issue date: 3/22/07 Section: Science
1 The heat is on in Washington as cries for serious action on climate change come from across the country. Citizens, universities and even businesses are increasingly demanding reforms. The question is no longer whether the federal government will institute changes, but rather how exactly the changes will be made.

There are four climate action bills currently being reviewed on Capitol Hill. Although they vary in strictness, they all call for mandatory caps and gradual reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. This approach reflects a resolute commitment to promoting sustainable energy and confronting the impacts of global climate change.

The push for change has started outside of Washington. For example, several major universities, including Brown, the University of Pennsylvania and Cornell have recently announced plans to go carbon-neutral.

Hopkins has not been left out. The new Flexcar car-sharing program is being introduced this week as part of the Sustainability Initiative. Several other steps to reduce energy consumption at Hopkins are in the works, including using renewable energies and designing more efficient buildings.

The Hopkins Energy Action Team (HEAT), a student group, seeks to challenge our community to rise above even the federal proposals currently under consideration by going completely carbon-neutral.

Hopkins joins other organizations across the country pursuing reformed energy policy. The U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of major corporations in the energy and chemical industries along with environmental groups, is making a push for ambitious federal emission caps. Many large cities, such as Seattle, Washington and Boulder, Co., have accepted the Kyoto Protocol in their jurisdictions, aiming unilaterally to reduce their emissions.

Widespread public support is making an impact on Washington's decisions. The four bills currently on the table show that the federal government is finally trying to responsibly address the issue of global warming.

All of the bills propose a "declining cap-and-trade" system, which mandates an overall emissions limit for polluters. In addition, industries can buy and trade permits so the overall level of pollutants decreases while the companies continue to function profitably.

The most conservative bill, written by Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), proposes a cap-and-trade system that limits the intensity of emissions. Allowable intensity would be reduced yearly by 2.6 percent from 2012 to 2021. The bill also proposes a limit on the amount of money companies would be forced to spend on emission reduction efforts.

Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.) and Thomas Carper (D-Del.) introduced a bill that would cap allowable emissions at 2006 levels starting in 2011 to 2014. The bill would also allow carbon-offsetting (such as planting trees) as a substitute for emissions cuts.

A bill originally authored by Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) was recently re-introduced by Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.). This bill would require industries, especially heavy polluters, to cap their 2012 emissions at the 2000 level, then decrease their emissions to just one-third of 2000 levels by 2050. The bill also offers subsidies for nuclear power.

The most ambitious bill, proposed by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), calls for the electric and automotive industries to reduce emissions by 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2050, which would be achieved through incentives for clean energy technologies. This bill supports but does not require a cap-and-trade system.

Countless individuals and organizations across the country are discovering the many benefits of sustainable energy policies. This wave of change has finally reached the nation's capital. The country is headed in a new direction, and Hopkins has the opportunity to be at the forefront of this wave of change
media.www.jhunewsletter.com.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (10822)3/25/2007 1:18:27 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36921
 
McFarlane: Renewable Energy Best Solution To Terror Threats
Salazar Looks To Solar, Biomass, Wind Technology

POSTED: 3:19 pm MDT March 24, 2007

DENVER -- The United States should accelerate development of renewable energy sources because of increased risk from terrorist attacks that could cripple the economy, former national security adviser Robert McFarlane said Saturday.

Message 23399791



To: stockman_scott who wrote (10822)3/26/2007 11:42:21 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36921
 
Climate Cold War
In the energy crisis today, as in the nuclear standoff of the 1970s, the world needs to rally against a mortal threat.

By Klaus Schwab
Newsweek
Issues 2007 - Some prominent oilmen insist that high prices simply take us back to the '70s. They see many parallels, including the way high prices have made for tense geopolitics, with national oil companies gaining power and private multinationals fearing for their future. This is a strangely comforting thought, because if history is repeating itself, the same prescriptions should cure the problem. In the 1970s nations diversified their energy supplies, consumers conserved and prices came down.

Unfortunately, the energy landscape has changed fundamentally since the 1970s. Reserve supplies are tighter in all segments, from electric supply to refining, making the system more fragile. Resources are more concentrated, with close to two thirds of remaining oil reserves in the Middle East and the majority of natural-gas reserves split among three countries: Russia, Iran and Qatar. (Natural gas was not part of the energy picture in the '70s.) China and India are now major consuming nations. Most important, global warming has changed forever the way we must approach energy crises.

The world is faced with a truly global climate threat at a time when our systems for dealing with it are less and less effective. Power everywhere is moving from the center to the periphery. Within nations, vertical command-and-control structures are eroding. It's increasingly difficult for multilateral organizations to take powerful collective action. Witness our collective impotence in the face of rogue and failed states, the collapse of world-trade talks, the crisis in Darfur.

If we really want to draw lessons from the 1970s, they should be in reference not to the oil shocks but to a far more fundamental threat. The risk of global warming is, arguably, comparable to nuclear war in terms of its potential to destroy the planet. During the cold war we didn't ask our leaders to prepare for the cleanup after Armageddon, or the trials of living in nuclear winter. We asked them to act so the war would not happen. Whatever stand we took on the arms race, the need for collective action to stop nuclear war was understood by all.

One difference now is that the international organizations that once helped to frame collective action, like NATO or the United Nations, can no longer do the job. What's needed are new, multidimensional institutions that can bring together the wide range of groups, nations, corporations and individuals necessary to tackle our problems. If there is a positive in the current energy crisis, it is that it could "midwife" the kind of institutions that can manage our new global interdependence. Global warming demands a new system of global governance that takes account of how our world has changed since the 1970s. And how energy has become a survival issue.

Schwab is founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum.
msnbc.msn.com



To: stockman_scott who wrote (10822)3/29/2007 11:08:45 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 36921
 
CLIMATE CHANGE:
Coastal Mega-Cities in for a Bumpy Ride
Srabani Roy

NEW YORK, Mar 28 (IPS) - About 643 million people, or one-tenth of the world's population, who live in low lying coastal areas are at great risk of oceans-related impacts of climate change, according to a global research study to be released next month.

The study, by researchers at Columbia University's Centre for International Earth Sciences Information Network and the London-based International Institute for Environment and Development, is the first of its kind. The researchers identified populations, particularly urban populations, at greatest risk from rising sea levels and more intense storms due to climate change.

"Of the more than 180 countries with populations in the low-elevation coastal zone, 130 of them -- about 70 percent -- have their largest urban area extending into that zone," said Bridget Andersen, a research associate at CIESIN, in a statement.

"Furthermore, the world's largest cities -- those with more than five million residents -- have on average one-fifth of their population and one-sixth of their land area within this coastal zone."

The study, which will be published in the peer-reviewed journal Environment and Urbanisation, assesses the risks to populations and urban settlements along coastal areas that are less than 10 metres above sea level, referred to as the low-elevation coastal zone, or LECZ. Although globally this zone accounts for only two percent of the world's land area, it contains 10 percent of the world's population and 13 percent of the world's urban population, the study found.

The 10 countries with the largest number of people living in this vulnerable, low-elevation zone, include in descending order: China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, Egypt, the United States, Thailand and the Philippines.

Cities such as Dhaka, Shanghai and Mumbai are some of the most susceptible to coastal, climate-related hazards such as floods, storms and cyclones. And the rapid urbanisation occurring in these cities -- especially in China, which has growing special economic zones along its coasts -- will continue to attract more and more people.

"On average, costal cities are growing 20 percent faster than any other cities in the world and they have 10-15 percent higher densities than other cities," Sharad Shankardass, spokesperson for the U.N.'s agency for human settlements, UN-Habitat, told IPS. "Of the 20 mega-cities in the world, 15 of them are coastal."

The study found that 75 percent of people living in the vulnerable low-elevation zone and two-thirds of the world's urban population are in Asia. In conjunction with the findings of the CIESIN-IIED study, 11 of the 15 coastal mega-cities listed by UN-Habitat in 2005 are in low-medium income countries. The study found that 14 percent of the population of least developed countries live in the LECZ, compared to only 10 percent in wealthier countries.

Twenty-one percent of the urban populations in least developed countries live in this zone. In richer countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, this number drops to 11 percent. Human settlements in lower income countries with limited resources are, therefore, significantly more vulnerable to climate-related hazards.

"It is very clear in my mind that poor countries will have a disproportionate burden," Deborah Balk, a project investigator and co-author of the study, told IPS, "particularly those with large deltaic regions."

In fact, of the top 10 countries, Bangladesh, Egypt and Vietnam have a large proportion of their populations living within the LECZ: 46, 38 and 55 percent respectively. The Bahamas, the Netherlands, and Suriname have well over 70 percent of their populations living in the LECZ.

The study was partially funded by the Swedish International Development Corporation Agency and the Danish International Development Agency, both of which have programmes in urban environmental issues. Researchers overlaid geographic data, the most recently available census data, and information on urban settlements, to produce maps showing the populations and land area in the LECZ for 244 countries. The information was then summarised by country, region and income category.

The study makes it clear that sea levels are not expected to rise anywhere near the 10 metres of the low-elevation zone. The fourth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report estimated that sea levels are likely to rise in the range of 22-34 centimetres between 1990 and the 2080s. This level could be significantly higher with accelerated melting of the Greenland and polar ice sheets, the study noted.

Although small island states have the largest share of land in the low-elevation zone (16 percent), and would, therefore, be most likely to be affected by sea-related hazards, they tend to have less of their population living in the zone. Balk attributed this to the fact that people living on such islands are more adapted to coastal hazards and tend to live further inland.

"The study demonstrates how critical an issue this is from a global perspective -- it is certainly not just one for small island states," Gordon McGranahan, head of the human settlements group at IIED and co-author on the study, told IPS.

According to Tanya Imola, spokesperson for the international association of local governments, ICLEI, many cities have started implementing environmental programmes to address climate change and to curb their overall carbon footprint. Initiatives include improvements to public transportation, recycling programmes and energy efficiency. But only a few cities have started thinking about how to address the effects of sea level rise and other ocean-related hazards.

The authors of the CIESIN-IIED study categorise three types of responses to address these risks: migration, mitigation and modification. Both McGranahan and Balk agreed that these strategies have a long lead time.

UN-Habitat and the U.N. Environment Programme have initiated joint projects to address these issues, but UN-Habitat's Shankardass pointed out that "we are still in the early stages of establishing a realistic strategy for intervention and implementation for cities that will be directly affected by climate change."

Of utmost importance, McGranahan noted, is to start working with national and local authorities engaged in urban and environmental issues, and for them to start making commitments to these types of strategies now.

"Ultimately, adaptation has to be negotiated locally, and so we want to combine this sort of global analysis with local engagement," he told IPS. (END/2007) k
ipsnews.net